Most conventional explosive devices such as explosive weapons are configured to detonate at a predetermined time or under predetermined conditions, by dropping the device, for example, or via relatively highly sophisticated ignition timing and/or triggering means. As is well known throughout the world, however, explosive devices do not always detonate when desired, often due to failure of the firing mechanism or the absence of expected conditions conducive to detonation. Unexploded explosives can present a danger to all persons who may happen to come into contact with them during a military operation, and even decades after suspension or resolution of an armed conflict. In particular, disposal personnel and non-combatants may be exposed to a substantial risk of death or dismemberment when engaging in activities within an initially failed explosive's zone of action. Even though explosives may fail to explode as intended, the explosive charge(s) and firing mechanisms may remain susceptible to activation by a variety of external forces such as heat, mechanical shock and other means. Cluster bombs, which may leave numerous unexploded and widely dispersed bomblets, pose a particular threat to non-combatants residing in armed conflict zones. The global benefits of fail-safe mechanisms for explosive devices are clear.
Over the years, various systems have been proposed to address the foregoing problems. U.S. Pat. No. 6,539,872 to Tipkin represents one such strategy and is directed to fuze “sterilization” using a sacrificial anodic component. Tipkin proposes a method of fuze sterilization wherein a first component and a second component having a prescribed relationship required for proper detonation of the fuze are positioned in a fuze device. The first and second components are fabricated from materials having different galvanic potentials. An electrolyte introduced between the first and second component initiates galvanic corrosion of one of the components, which may continue for a period of time until the prescribed relationship between the first and second components changes sufficiently to disable the detonation operation of the fuse. While Tipkin may be applicable to certain types of explosives and in certain environments, its passive fuze disabling approach is not without shortcomings.
The present disclosure is directed to one or more of the problems or shortcomings set forth above.